Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 446 U.S. 335 - Cuyler v. Sullivan

Cuyler v. Sullivan’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

9,619
cited by 9,619 later decisions
93
cited 93 times by the Supreme Court
48
states following
March 2026
most recently cited

2,728 federal appellate · 304 district · 3,841 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9,619 later decisions (93 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2026 · most notably Strickland v. Washington (1984), Williams v. Taylor (2000)

2,728 federal appellate · 304 district · 3,841 state decisions — followed in 48 states

3.2k019801990200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Third Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Glasser v. United States · Johnson v. Zerbst · Gideon v. Wainwright · Neil v. Biggers · Townsend v. Sain

Cited together with Strickland v. Washington · Holloway v. Arkansas · Glasser v. United States · Wood v. Georgia · Sumner v. Mata

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 9,619 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “an actual conflict of interest adversely affected his lawyer's performance.”
    563 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “diverge with respect to a material factual or legal issue or to a course of action.”
    29 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Whenever two or more defendants have been jointly charged pursuant to Rule 8(b) or have been joined for trial pursuant to Rule 13, and are represented by the same retained or assigned counsel or by retained or assigned counsel who are associated in the practice of law, the court shall promptly inquire with respect to such joint representation and shall personally advise each defendant of his right to the effective assistance of counsel, including separate representation. Unless it appears that there is good cause to believe no conflict of interest is likely to arise, the court shall take such measures as may be appropriate to protect each defendant’s right to counsel.”
    27 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.